Fossils - Exposing the Evolutionist slight-of-hand

nimlore-Please do not take this as sarcasm. I honestly didn't understand what you meant by "well I have faith that they are there."did you mean:"faith that discrepencies in the fossil record are there which will overturn evolutionary theory when they are found",or simply:"faith that the fossils are where they are due to the flood despite the fact that their placement seems counterintuitive given that explanation"?Also, I have a nagging question for anyone willing to answer it, especially from the creationist-flood camp.Even if one accepts various "settling" theories for the specified sorting of fossil beds--- including theories based on the ability of creatures to escape the flood for longer periods of time--- how does that explain the "Age of Fish" at all?Why would fish have died out en masse during a flood? This includes if earthquakes or hurricanes were going on in addition to a flood.It's not like you can drown them or blow them away.So wouldn't "fish" (as in the many fish species seen in the "Age of Fish" beds) have survived the longest of all living things and been at the top of the sediment pile (if any were going to die), instead of stuck somewhere between eukaryotes and reptiles?I'd like to enhance my question a bit with a nod to biblical literature itself.Didn't Noah only take on board two of every terrestrial specie? As it stands I'm not sure they would have had the technology to make fishtanks, much less saltwater fishtanks... imagine how big the boat would have been just to save the sharks and whales!In fact, a catastrophic "flood" tends to suggest in and of itself that only land animals were at risk unless precautions were taken... hence the ark.Thus by any logic, including bible logic, it doesn't make sense that huge numbers of fish species would have died out at all, much less dying out before terrestrial creatures.thanks+holmes